Abolish the lame-duck period?

Podcast Episode Summary

The podcast episode, "The Lame Duck Problem," explores the concept of the lame duck period in the United States, which refers to the time between a presidential election and the inauguration of the new president. Ian Millhiser, a writer for Vox, joins the host to discuss the history and implications of this period.

Main Topic: The Lame Duck Period and its Problems

Key Points:

1. The lame duck period was originally intended to allow for the transition of power, but it has become a source of problems, including anti-democratic tendencies, lack of accountability, and difficulties in conducting diplomacy.
2. The episode highlights three previous presidential transitions that ended catastrophically: the transition from James Buchanan to Abraham Lincoln, which led to the Civil War; the transition from Benjamin Harrison to Grover Cleveland, which led to a market panic; and the transition from Herbert Hoover to Franklin D. Roosevelt, which delayed the response to the Great Depression.
3. Ian Millhiser argues that the lame duck period is too long and that it should be shortened to prevent similar problems in the future.
4. The episode compares the US transition period to those of other countries, such as Canada, India, Japan, France, and Britain, which have much quicker transitions.
5. Millhiser suggests that a constitutional amendment could shorten the lame duck period, but acknowledges that it would be a difficult process.